Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Please tell me how a "redlight camera" violates your civil rights

they don't bother me, but i tend to follow the traffic laws.

The trail camera taking a photo of a person trespassing only confirms the act. If no one can identify the trespasser, the photo is of no use. All you have is an unknown trespasser.

That is failed logic. If you operate like that, YOU become part of the problem. You are putting your head in the sand while government stretches if not ignores the Constitution. By the time YOU sit up and take notice, it may be too late to act. Please think more clearly!

The timing of the lights on the entrance ramps is set by how high the traffic flow is. A shorten sequence for lesser traffic volume and longer for more. That is if they are properly working. More nanny state bullcrap that needs to stop!

A picture of a car running a red light confirms the act. A picture of the driver confirms the identity.

No it doesn't. That is not how the system works. The registered owner gets the tag. The have no clue as to who was driving. There is no attempt made at finding out who the driver is. Furthermore, simply by being on private property without permission constitutes trespassing, driving on a city street doesn't. The difference is the lack of due process.

Well, I'm man enough to admit that I know nothing about Mn., but that ain't the way it works here. A car can't commit a crime in Texas...just the driver.

Well then do you really understand how the camera system works?
If someone from a PD had to track down who was driving at the time, then you would have been money ahead putting a cop in a plain jane squad with a ticket book. A real traffic stop!

I've sat in on city council meetings, in uniform. All they cared about was the revenue stream.

Furthermore, there is no quicker way to turn the public against the PD than crap like this.

If I recall, the same US Constitution we have in MN is the same one in TX..

Doesn't sound like it.

No,but using those photos to justify a revenue stream and not being able to confront your accuser does.

In addition,if someone takes your photo,in public and uses that photo of you for thier own means, they are legally bound to get your permission to do so. If you don't belive me,contact several commercial photographers and ask them.

I hear people are getting whacked in N Korea now, since being photo'ed not crying enough at the boss's funeral.

I didnt' read through all this, but what if you don't know who the driver is? I have a few vehicles that my wife, mother, friends, nephews, have access to becasue they are specialty vehicles, they are welcome to use them at anytime.

I have no clue if a said vehicle was out or is even gone right now...

WTF do you do there.

This may help safety wise but its an overextension of reach if you ask me.

You need more enforcement, then patrol the intersection and actually catch folks.

It is the States burden to prove guilt, not an individuals responsibility to prove innocence. It is reasonable to inquire of a vehicles owner the identity of who was operating it when a crime was committed. You don't know, you don't know.

Out here(DFW) once again, these fines don't go on your driving record, so seems that is nothing but a revenue collecting point.
The ticket does not go on your driving record.
You get a written ticket in Texas from LEO, you pay, that will go on your driving record.

Now someone explain to me why that is so.

No California rolling stops for me.

Don't get me wrong, it is the desire of every politician to get revenue to spend on their pet projects. Cameras are a "round about" to issue citations and collect revenue, as well as make intersections safer. You can't even SUGGEST to a LEO in Texas that they should write citations without commtting a crime, but they can put out as many cameras as they want. If it's not forwarded to DPS records, that's probably some sort of local political decision to keep bitching down.

Regardless of hwy they are installed (and revenue may be one reason since few towns can afford the number of cops needed), anyone can avoid the fines by just not speeding or running red lights. Pretty easy solution to me.

I'll bet that the cities that do this out here do not have to share with the state any revenue either.
Remember last Leg. session the State was going to outlaw any new cameras law deal. So what happened was the cities that had red light cams, went out and signed 20 year extensions on the contract so they would always (20 or more years) have the cams. Then the new law did not pass. Thought that was funny.

So now the cities are trying to figure out how to collect the fines for the thousands that are not paying. Best they can do right now is not renew your car plate until fines are paid. If you live in Dallas county and get a red light ticket in Tarrant county, not much of a way to collect. Be interesting to see if a warrant is issued for not paying the fine.

It's for red lights stops only. You ever hit a just turned yellow @ speed limit of say 40 and rolled on through? You ever want to make a right on Red (legal out here) and rolled @ 1/4 MPH through the light.
Oh, glad your a perfect driver and person.

I oppose red light camera and speed cameras based upon what I consider "fairness".

While it is true that life isn't fair I look at the relationship between LEO's and criminals, including speeders and red light runners, as a game of cat and mouse. The LEO, cat, has to catch the mouse, criminal. Cameras take the fun out of it and make it just another form of taxation for driving on roads we already paid taxes on.

Well dang...you made me look it up. Jurisdictions (in Texas) can only keep 5% of revenues derived from citations issued by officers, but...
_______________________________________

Sec. 542.406. DEPOSIT OF REVENUE FROM CERTAIN TRAFFIC PENALTIES. (a) In this section, "photographic traffic signal enforcement system" means a system that:(1) consists of a camera system and vehicle sensor installed to exclusively work in conjunction with an electrically operated traffic-control signal;(2) is capable of producing one or more recorded photographic or digital images that depict the license plate attached to the front or the rear of a motor vehicle that is not operated in compliance with the instructions of the traffic-control signal; and(3) is designed to enforce compliance with the instructions of the traffic-control signal by imposition of a civil or administrative penalty against the owner of the motor vehicle.(b) This section applies only to a civil or administrative penalty imposed on the owner of a motor vehicle by a local authority that operates or contracts for the operation of a photographic traffic signal enforcement system with respect to a highway under its jurisdiction or that operates or contracts for the operation of any other type of electronic traffic law enforcement system consisting of a camera system that automatically produces one or more recorded photographs or digital images of the license plate on a motor vehicle or the operator of a motor vehicle.(c) Not later than the 60th day after the end of a local authority's fiscal year, after deducting amounts the local authority is authorized by Subsection (d) to retain, the local authority shall:(1) send 50 percent of the revenue derived from civil or administrative penalties collected by the local authority under this section to the comptroller for deposit to the credit of the regional trauma account established under Section 782.002, Health and Safety Code; and(2) deposit the remainder of the revenue in a special account in the local authority's treasury that may be used only to fund traffic safety programs, including pedestrian safety programs, public safety programs, intersection improvements, and traffic enforcement.(d) A local authority may retain an amount necessary to cover the costs of:(1) purchasing or leasing equipment that is part of or used in connection with the photographic traffic signal enforcement system in the local authority;(2) installing the photographic traffic signal enforcement system at sites in the local authority, including the costs of installing cameras, flashes, computer equipment, loop sensors, detectors, utility lines, data lines, poles and mounts, networking equipment, and associated labor costs;(3) operating the photographic traffic signal enforcement system in the local authority, including the costs of creating, distributing, and delivering violation notices, review of violations conducted by employees of the local authority, the processing of fine payments and collections, and the costs associated with administrative adjudications and appeals; and(4) maintaining the general upkeep and functioning of the photographic traffic signal enforcement system.(e) Chapter 133, Local Government Code, applies to fee revenue described by Subsection (c)(1).(f) If under Section 133.059, Local Government Code, the comptroller conducts an audit of a local authority and determines that the local authority retained more than the amounts authorized by this section or failed to deposit amounts as required by this section, the comptroller may impose a penalty on the local authority equal to twice the amount the local authority:(1) retained in excess of the amount authorized by this section; or(2) failed to deposit as required by this section.